This article offers a hermeneutical account of ambiguity using Luke and Acts as an extended case study. After discussing the difficulties in identifying purposeful ambiguity in biblical texts, verbal ambiguity is distinguished from ambiguity beyond the sentence level, such as ambiguities of plot or character. Instead of approaching ambiguity primarily as a failure of language or a problem to be solved, this article offers a framework for thinking about ambiguity as an invitation to read a text from multiple angles. The discussion is illustrated throughout with a series of examples taken from Luke and Acts. I close with reflections on how this approach to ambiguity is helpful when reading scripture against different cultural contexts and in the study of New Testament Christology.

This paper considers Hans Boersma’s analysis of Bonaventure’s account of the beatific vision in his book Seeing God: The Beatific Vision in Christian Tradition. Boersma disputes Bonaventure’s claim in his Itinerarium Mentis in Deum that mystical union with God in this life takes place via the will and not the intellect, arguing that union with God must always produce union of the intellect and will. However, Boersma’s consideration of the Itinerarium fails to take into account Bonaventure’s other works, particularly his Commentary on the Gospel of John, in which he states that the beatific vision does unify the intellect and will, but that sin’s effect on the faculties makes the intellect unable to experience union with God in this life. This closer look at Bonaventure’s thought shows that Boersma needs a stronger account of the intellect and will to critique Bonaventure effectively.

Theodore Hiebert’s interpretation of Genesis 11:1-9 as a story of the origins of cultural difference resulted in several responses which critiqued his reading and reasserted the traditional reading of the passage as a story of human pride and divine punishment. In the following article, I combine two threads of Hiebert’s interpretation and his respondents: language and background understanding. Specifically, I compare two views of language on offer in the modern world, illustrate how they may shape the interpretation of Genesis 11:1-9 and argue that the minority view provides a framework which better makes sense of the passage.

Scholars studying cosmic conflict in the book of Revelation primarily focus on chapters 12–14, while the letters to the seven churches are often overlooked. In this article I demonstrate the presence of key elements of cosmic conflict in the letters to the seven churches, with a particular focus on the letter to the church in Smyrna (Rev 2:8–11). I identify the main facets of spiritual warfare, such as Jesus Christ versus the devil; Christians versus Jews/Romans; and victory/life versus defeat/death. I conclude that this passage contributes to the military narrative of cosmic conflict in the Apocalypse.

Ambrose of Milan’s hymn, ‘Splendor paternae gloriae’, uses metaphors of the sun and light to invoke the Trinity and invite God’s sanctifying work. Ambrose’s depiction of the Godhead in terms of the sun and its light demonstrates his careful engagement with traditional Christian metaphors, traditions which he carefully rearranges to align with his view of the Trinity. His representation of God’s sanctifying activity illustrates the Trinity’s inseparable operations, a central focus of his pro-Nicene works. These features suggest that Ambrose intended this hymn to serve as a confessio Trinitatis, perhaps amid the bishop’s conflicts with anti-Nicene factions in Milan.

This paper aims to examine Wolfhart Pannenberg’s theology of divine action using the conceptual framework of cognitive linguistics. Central to this exploration is Pannenberg’s use of the scientific concept of force field in an analogical/metaphorical way, enabling him to present a trinitarian-pneumatological understanding of divine action through divine omniscience and omnipresence. This paper argues that, despite justified criticisms of Pannenberg’s reliance on Faraday’s outdated concept of a universal force field, recent developments in cognitive linguistics affirm the legitimacy of Pannenberg’s panentheistic metaphorical approach to the theology of divine action while calling for revisions.